Tit for Tat Local Ltr to the Editor "this CONCOCTED war"

[UTUSN]

**********QUOTE*********

Crying over our 1,500 casualties

To the editor:

The people who keep crying about losing 1,500 lives so far in the Middle East don’t know how silly they look to World War II veterans.

In one of the final battles, a total of 181,000 casualties were suffered by both sides, in the Battle of the Bulge.

The president has explained over and over again that one of the reasons we are over there is to prevent the need to fight the war on our soil.

Look up the total casualties in both theatres of WWII; you’ll be flabbergasted at what you learn from your research.

In case you don’t have time to look it up, U.S. forces lost 105,000-plus combat deaths in the Pacific plus 171,000 wounded. In Europe and Africa, U.S. forces lost 185,000-plus combat deaths and 484,000-plus wounded. Also, 165,000 non-combat deaths were suffered in these two theatres, per our VFW organization. This does not count the losses of our several allies in the war.



Don’t compare WWII, Iraq losses

To the editor:

Mr. Doe’s letter unfortunately reflects the feelings of many Americans ("Crying over our 1,500 casualties," May 6). I have a suggestion for Mr. Doe and those who agree with him: How about joining or have your children join the volunteer military and ask for an assignment in Iraq?

If not willing to do so, maybe he will agree the administration should reinstate the military draft, so all Americans — especially those in agreement with the war — can put their lives on the line and equally share in this concocted war.

How absurd to compare casualty figures from World War II, a total war fought against three major enemies (Japan, which attacked us, Italy and Germany, which aligned with Japan), with those from Iraq.

Iraq did not attack us. Iraq had no role in the Twin Tower attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.

How callous can anyone be, demeaning the death of any young American life by comparing it to a "crying over" cliché?

***********UNQUOTE************

[ewagner]

1. That guy missed the point

It's not how many deaths there were in WWII as compared to Iraq, the issue is that there have been over 1600 soldiers killed in Iraq in a war of choice as opposed to a war of necessity . We had to fight back in WWII but Iraq was a war of choice.

[ProfessorGAC]

2. Not Merely A War Of Choice

A war WE STARTED! We chose to fight the first Gulf War, because of the incursion of Iraq into Kuwait. (OK, there's some suspicion about the preceding events on that, but still, an ally was invaded.) We CHOSE to go into Bosnia.

This time, we CHOSE to START THIS WAR! I don't think it can get any worse than that.
The Professor

[carnie_sf]

3. We are actually

in a role much closer to that of Germany in 1936 than the role we played in WWII.

[ProfessorGAC]

4. Forced To Agree

As uncomfortable as agreeing to that may be, we started this war for no valid reasons other than a naked resource grab. We not only chose to go to this war, we chose to start one that would benefit nobody but us.
The Professor